ArticleBMC oral health2022
Assessment of reliability and information quality of YouTube videos about root canal treatment after 2016.
Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, readability, and transparency of Arabic online health information on temporomandibular disorders: An infodemiological analysis of 408 websites.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Review
- Navigating digital resources in dental education: a cross-sectional comparison of the educational quality of rubber dam videos on Youtube and Instagram.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the content quality and trustworthiness of snakebite envenomation videos on social media platforms: insights from TikTok and Bilibili.Tropical medicine and health · 2026Article
- Network Influence vs. Credibility in YouTube Sleep-Health Communication.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- Assessing quality and reliability of online videos on peritoneal dialysis: a Douyin video-based study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Scrolls, screens and search bars: exploring family search behaviour and the quality of online information on molar incisor hypomineralisation.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- YouTube™ as an information source for non-surgical root canal retreatment: quality and content analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Quality, reliability, and transparency of late-life depression videos on Chinese social media: a cross-sectional study of Douyin, Rednotes, and BiliBili.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Platform-mediated patient access to apical surgery information on Chinese short-video platforms: a cross-sectional study of clinical accuracy, transparency, and misinformation risk.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos on Poisonings, Insect Bites, and Envenomations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Recurrent aphthous stomatitis information on TikTok: satisfactory or substandard?Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Quality Assessment of Health Information on Social Media During a Public Health Crisis: Infodemiology Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Quality and Reliability of YouTube Videos Providing Nutritional Recommendations for Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- Comparison of YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram as digital sources for obtaining information about pulp therapy in primary and permanent teeth.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Quality and Educational Value of YouTube Videos on Class IV Resin Composite Restorations.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT Responses About Sexual Activity After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparative Study with Observers of Different Experience Levels.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Quality Analysis of YouTube-Based Exercise Programs for Typically Developing Children: Content Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Are videos uploaded by dental professionals on lip repositioning surgery of higher quality? A youtube video analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess and update the content, reliability, and information quality of content related to root canal treatment (RCTx) on YouTube and evaluate the correlation between each evaluation index.
methodsYouTube was searched using two terms related to RCTx ("root canal and endodontic treatment"). A total of 240 videos (120 for each search term) were screened. Exclusion criteria were as follows: no sound or visuals, non-English, irrelevant to the search term, longer than 15 min, duplicate, or old (uploaded before 2016). After exclusion, 50 videos of "root canal treatment" and 45 videos of "endodontic treatment" were analyzed. Video length, total number of views, likes, dislikes, comments, and days since upload were recorded using descriptive video data. Viewers' interaction, reliability and information quality of the video, and quality of video content were measured using nondescriptive video data. The interaction index and video power index were used for viewer interactions, and the modified DISCERN index, JAMA criteria, and Global Quality Score were used to assess the reliability and information quality of the video. The quality of the video content was measured using the completeness score.
resultsThe videos of the "root canal treatment" group had a significantly higher completeness score for the etiology and symptoms (p < 0.05), and videos of the "endodontic treatment" group showed a higher interaction index, completeness score for the procedure (p < 0.05). Videos for dentists had significantly higher completeness scores for the procedure, while videos for laypersons had higher completeness scores for etiology, anatomy, symptoms, and prognosis (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the total completeness score and the interaction index of the videos for laypersons were significantly higher (p < 0.05). The videos uploaded by the university had a significantly higher modified DISCERN index (p = 0.044), and the JAMA score was significantly higher in the commercial group (p = 0.001).
conclusionsAlthough the accuracy of videos related to RCTx was higher in videos by universities and professionals, the total completeness of YouTube videos was low regardless of the video source. Therefore, professionals should be responsible for providing more accurate and reliable videos.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.